Disproving atheists in 82 seconds

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by peilthetraveler, Mar 2, 2012.

  1. Checkmate.



    <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/iAY9d-tiO_Y" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
     
  2. Ridiculous. The hierarchical nature and complexity of a modern cell is entirely different than the simple cells that it evolved from. Also once the raw materials are combined into the complex molecules in a cell they cannot simply be reduced back to their initial condition. It's like saying you can take a cake, crumble it up and then be able to make a new cake. It can't be done because, among other things, the proteins in the flour are now denatured.

    A great example of psuedoscience and a really pitiful argument.

    Science has some very plausible scenarios for life to form on early earth and has modeled some of the processes in the lab. Currently they are creating new types of cells from other cell parts and within twenty years will probably be able to create life from the bottom up.

    "WASHINGTON — Around the world, a handful of scientists are trying to create life from scratch and they’re getting closer.
    Experts expect an announcement within three to 10 years from someone in the now little-known field of “wet artificial life.”"

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/2024962...s-expect-create-life-next-years/#.T1GEJvES09g
     
  3. jem

    jem

    of course since you have no idea what the first living cell was or looked like you are just guessing your ass off.

    as of now science does not have any proof that life evolved from non life. They do not even have a complete plausible pathway. And, they may never.
     
  4. jem

    jem

    of course since you have no idea what the first living cell was or looked like you are just guessing your ass off.

    according to the scientist quoted in your piece.. szostak, science does not have a complete plausible pathway showing how life evolved from non life.
     
  5. Umm yeah they do, life came from simple terrestrial processes, because the earth went from being a lifeless rock to having life.

    They have many plausible pathways and they have a fairly good idea about how it probably looked. Within 20 years they will be able to make in the lab. If it can made in the lab it could be made on earth.

    The fossil record goes from complex to simple as we go back in time. The earliest fossils are bacteria. Simple logic leads one to conclude a very simple common bacteria-like origin for all life on earth.
     
  6. rew

    rew

    This is the argument from idiocy. "We're too stupid to figure out how life started so God must have snapped his fingers and created it."

    The problem is that we're also too stupid to figure out how God started. So I guess that proves there is no God. Or else it proves that some Uber God created God. So why are people worshiping this mere God when they should be bowing down before the Uber God? Who himself had to be created by an Ultra Uber God. It's amazing the things we can deduce using the argument from idiocy.
     
  7. God of the Gaps is what this is officially called. If we don't understand it, God did it.

    We have too much ego as a group to say, we just don't know yet, but we are working on it.
     
  8. I watched the video. I had to laugh.

    Proximity, gravity, electricity.

    Find out how a living organism works, in detail, and you will find that this cat is just a preacher.
     
  9. How do you know that earth wasn't seeded with life from an extraterrestrial source? You don't. You're just talking out of your ass.
     
  10. It's also idiocy to deduce that there's no God because some people "think" that "we're too stupid to figure out how life started so God must have snapped his fingers and created it."
     
    #10     Mar 3, 2012